PerspectivesontheFood-Energy-Water
NexusinMetroSeattle:
Asynthesisreportbasedon
stakeholderinterviews
October2016
LIZALLEN1,MICHAELBRADY2,DOUGLASCOLLINS1,BRADGAOLACH3,
KEVANMOFFETT4,JULIEPADOWSKI5,6,KIRTIRAJAGOPALAN1,SASHARICHEY6,7
1.WSUCenterforSustainingAgricultureandNaturalResources,2.WSUSchoolofEconomics,3.WSU
MetropolitanCenterforAppliedResearchandExtension,4.WSUSchooloftheEnvironment,5.Centerfor
EnvironmentalResearch,EducationandOutreach,6.StateofWashingtonWaterResearchCenter,7.WSU
DepartmentofCivilandEnvironmentalEngineering
1
PerspectivesontheFood-Energy-WaterNexusinMetroSeattle:
Asynthesisreportbasedonstakeholderinterviews
DraftforPublicComment
October2016
CONTENTS:
1. Introduction.........................................................................................................................3
1.1. Researchgoals..............................................................................................................3
1.2. Motivationsforthiswork.............................................................................................4
1.3. Stakeholdergroupsandinterviewapproach...............................................................7
2. StakeholderinterviewfindingsabouttheSeattle-WashingtonFEWnexus........................8
2.1. Multiplevisionsofasustainablefoodsystemfuture...................................................8
2.2. OnsustainingregionalFood,EnergyandWater........................................................10
2.3. Onpromotinglocallyproducedfood.........................................................................12
2.4. Onpoliciesandstakeholderdecisions.......................................................................15
3. NextSteps..........................................................................................................................19
4. Acknowledgements...........................................................................................................20
5. References.........................................................................................................................21
6. Appendix:Additionalinformationanddataresources.....................................................23
2
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1.RESEARCHGOALS
Inearly2016,aninterdisciplinaryteamofWashingtonStateUniversityresearcherscame
togethertostudyinterdependenciesamongfood,energy,andwater(FEW)resourcesystems.
Asurbanareasconcentratebothresourcesandresourceneeds,theSeattlemetropolitanarea
wasselectedasacasestudytobetterunderstandflowsofFEWresourcesintoandoutofan
urbanarea.Theinitialprojectfocusisonfoodproductionasitrelatestoenergyandwater
resourceuse.Ultimately,thisworkwillprovideafoundationtoassesshowfoodandagriculture
policiesandprogramsmayimpactinteractionsamongFEWresources.
LONGTERMOBJECTIVESOFTHEWSUFOOD-ENERGY-WATERRESEARCHTEAM
A)IdentifyFEWstocksandflowsintoandout-ofthreenesteddomainssurroundingthe
Seattlemetropolitanarea:KingCounty,westernWashington,andtheStateof
Washington.
B)AssessthewaterandenergysectorimplicationsofincreasingtheamountofSeattle’s
foodthatissourcedlocallyversusimportingfoodtomeeturbandemand.
C)DevelopamodelofFEWresourceinterdependenciesthatsupportsdecision-makersin
craftingscientificallyinformedpoliciestoincentivizelocalversusimportedfood,energy,
andwaterproductionanduse.
Tosupporttheselong-termgoals,ourresearchteamisworkingtoidentifyinformationneeds
amongdiversestakeholdersandtolocaterelevantdatasourcesthatwillbeusedtodefinea
conceptualmodelofFEWflowsandworktowardaquantitativemodelofphysicalprocesses.
Weinterviewed27stakeholdersfromacrosswesternWashingtonwhoareworkingonissues
relatedtofood,agriculture,landuseplanning,andenergyandwaterresourcemanagement.
Thegoalsofinterviewsweretodeepenourunderstandingofthefactorsthatinfluence
decisionsaboutFEWsystemsmanagement,andofemergingconcerns,conflicts,andevolving
foodandagriculturalpoliciesintheSeattlearea.
ThisdraftreportisintendedtoengageSeattle-areacitizenswhoareinterestedinfoodsystems
andagriculturalpolicyinaconversationaboutcomplexinteractionsamongfood,energy,and
watersystemsandtounderstanddiversevisionsforthefutureofthegreater-Seattleregional
foodsystem.Weareinterestedinyourfeedbackaboutthecontentofthisreportandyour
inputduringtheupcomingSeattleFood-Energy-WaterSummit.
3
SEEKINGINPUTFROMOURSTAKEHOLDERS
PleasejoinusonNovember18,2016@theBrightwaterCenterinWoodinvilletoshare
yourperspectives
Seehttp://metrocenter.wsu.edu/metrofew-summit2016/forfullconferencedetails
• Wouldyouliketoseemoreorlessofthefoodyoubuyorconsumeproducedin
metroSeattle?InKingCounty?InWashingtonState?
•
Towhatextentdoyouvalue“localfood”?Howdoyoudefine“local”?
•
WhatpoliciesandprogramswouldbeimpactfulinincreasingSeattleconsumers’
accesstolocallyproducedfood?
•
WhatdoyoubelievearethelargestenergyinputstoSeattle’sfoodsystem?
•
WhatdoyoubelievearethelargestwaterinputstoSeattle’sfoodsystem?
•
Whatlocalpoliciesandprogramscouldreducewaterconsumption,energy
consumption,andgreenhousegasemissionsassociatedwiththefoodsystem?
•
Whatlocalpoliciesandprogramscouldsupportresilienceofthefoodsysteminthe
faceofenvironmentalandsocialchange?
•
Howdoyouthinkthatincreasinglocalfoodproductionwouldimpactenergyand
waterresourceuses?
1.2.MOTIVATIONSFORTHISWORK
Thepastcenturyhasseensubstantialchangesinhowsocietymanagesfood,water,andenergy.
Thepre-industrialandearly-industrialeconomieswereinextricablylinkedtotheavailabilityof
waterandenergytodofarmwork.Ifonecomponentofafarmwasnotmanagedsustainably,
theeffectswouldbeimmediatelyapparent.Forexample,ifpumpingwatertoirrigateacrop
forcedafarmertospendmoreonenergycoststhanthevalueoftheircropthedisparityin
inputcostsandprofitswouldquicklybecomeapparent.Withbothindustrialdevelopmentand
increasingurbanizationcameincreasingseparationoffood,energy,andwaterresource
management.
Inourmoderncontext,factorsincludingclimatechange,populationgrowth,urban
development,andinternationaltradeagreementshaveledtoincreasingcomplexityofFEW
managementdecisions.Figure1illustratestheprogressioninthecouplingofFEWsystemsover
time.Asillustratedintheright-mostpanelofthefigure,somedecisionsleadtoshort-term
benefitsinonesector,butultimatelynegativelyimpactothersectors.Inordertofind“win-winwin”solutions,resourcemanagersmustrecognizethatfood,energyandwatersystemsare
4
tightlycoupled,witheachsectorbalancing,offsetting,andabsorbingthechangesinother
sectors.Possibleunintendedconsequencesofdecisionsmustbeconsideredandsystemsmust
bemanagedholistically.
Figure1.TightercouplingofFEWsystemsovertime.Circlesizeindicatesrelativecomplexityof
sectormanagementdecisionsandcircleoverlapsindicatemanagementinterconnections.
(ImageadaptedfromAdam,PadowskiandBarber,indevelopment.)
RECOGNIZINGFEWSYSTEMINTERCONNECTIONS
Food,energy,andwateraredeeplyintertwinedinmanyofthemodernagricultural
productionsystemsandintransport,processing/cooking,andconsumption,andwaste
managementofmodernfoodstuffs.Understandinghowchangestoonesectorimpact
andinfluencetheothertwosectorsiscriticalifFEWsystemsaretobemanaged
sustainably.Examplesoftheseinterconnectionsare:
•
Demandformorebiofuelproductioncouldleadtoincreaseddemandforoilseed
crops.This“win”intheenergysectormightbelinkedtofertilizerrunoffand
intensivewaterusethatnegativelyimpactswaterqualityandquantityandfood
crops.
•
Convertingdairymanuretofuelinanaerobicdigestersystemsmayreduce
methaneemissions(apowerfulgreenhousegas)andincreasethesupplyof
locallyproducedrenewableenergy,butwastefromsuchsystemsmayleadto
degradedlocalwaterquality.
•
Growingfoodcropsindoorscouldbeaviablewaytoexpandlocalfood
productioninurbanareasandextendtheseasonalavailabilityoffreshlocal
producewhiletakingadvantageofincreasedwateravailabilityoutofhigh
summerdemand,butcouldbecostlyinenergyusagetomaintainbuildingclimate
control.
•
Expandingwateraccessforfoodcropirrigationcouldnecessitatecurtailmentof
5
waterformunicipaluse,hydropowergeneration,andin-streamecosystemflows.
PrioritiesandapproachestomanagingFEWresourcesvaryacrosslocal,state,regionaland
federalagencies.Urbanareasarehot-spotsofconsumptionforFEWresources.Whenfoodis
importedtofeedanurbanpopulationitcarrieswithitthe“virtual”waterandenergyresources
thatwereused,elsewhere,toproduce,process,andtransportit.Increasinglocalfood
productioncoulddecreasevirtualresourceflows,butmayutilizemoreenergyandwaterlocally
forproductionandprocessingandmayputincreasedpressureonalreadyover-allocatedwater
suppliesinWashington.
Interviewsconductedduringsummer2016indicatethatconnectionsbetweenwaterresources
andfoodproductionarewellunderstoodbywesternWashingtonstakeholders(accesstowater
forirrigationandfloodingrisksclearlyaffecttheviabilityoffarmingoperations).However,
connectionsbetweenenergyandfoodsystemsintheregionarelessclearlydefinedandare
typicallylessattheforefrontofdecision-makers’concerns.Whenstakeholdersconsiderenergy
andwaterinterconnectionstheyoftenthinkintermsofwatermanagementforhydroelectric
energygeneration.Energycostsoftreatingwaterandpumpingwaterarelessfrequently
considered.
ConsiderationofFEWresourceinteractionsisvitalinthecontextofrapidregionalchange.
Washington’sOfficeofFinancialManagementestimatesthatKingCounty’spopulationwill
growfromabout1.9millionpeoplein2010toabout2.4millionpeoplein2040(SeattleOffice
ofPlanningandCommunityDevelopment,2016).In2015,thepopulationofthecentralPuget
Soundregiongrewby2.2%,thehighestgrowthrateinthepast20years(PugetSoundRegional
Council,2016).Andatthesametime,climatechangeisprojectedtoreducewateravailability
duringpeakgrowingseasonintheNorthwestUSduetolesswaterbeingstoredasmountain
snowpackandchangingprecipitationregimes(Luceetal.2013;Changetal.2013).
GlobalclimatechangeimpactsareexpectedtomakewesternWashingtonanevenmorecritical
agriculturalareaforfeedingthenationasotherregionsbecomelesssuitableforsometypesof
agriculturalproduction(Eigenbrodeetal.2013;Rosenzweigetal.2014).Thistransitionwill
bringtotheregionandstatebotheconomicopportunitiesandseriousconcernsaboutenergy,
water,landuseandagriculturalpollution.Manyintervieweesexpressedadesiretowork
towardimprovedcoordinationandcollaborationacrossagenciesandorganizationsintermsof
settinggoalsforthefutureoffoodproductionintheregionandaddressingbarrierstomeeting
thosegoals.
Throughmodeling,thisresearchwillstrengthenunderstandingofcomplexinterdependencies
amongFEWresourcesandenableexplorationofpolicyalternatives.Modelscannottellus
whichsystemorpolicyis“best”,buttheycansimulateFEWsectorinteractionsandsuggest
possibleoutcomesofspecificsystemchanges,tothensupportinformeddecisions.
6
1.3.STAKEHOLDERGROUPSANDINTERVIEWAPPROCH
Weareinterestedtolearnfromstakeholderswithawiderangeofprofessionalrolesand
perspectivesonFEWresourcemanagementaroundSeattleandWashingtonState.Wesought
tospeakwithindividualsrepresentingeachoffourgeneralgroups:1)producerrepresentatives,
2)consumerrepresentatives,3)energyandwaterpolicydecisionmakers,and4)foodpolicy
decisionmakers.Classifyingstakeholdersbasedontheirrolesisachallengeasmanyindividuals
workattheinterfaceoftwoormoregroups.Fromnearly200individualsidentifiedasmembers
ofthefourstakeholdergroups,weinvited50individualstobeinterviewedacrossarangeof
areasofexpertise.Atotalof27semi-structuredphoneinterviewswereconductedduring
summer2016,whichgeneratedawealthofinformationabouthowSeattle-areastakeholders
arethinkingabout“localfood”andwhatopportunitiesandchallengesthereareforlocalfood
production,distribution,equitableaccess,andrelatedpolicies.Seetheappendixforthefulllist
ofindividualswhowereinterviewedandtheirprofessionalaffiliations.
Producerrepresentatives(7individuals):individualsinwesternWashingtonwhoproducefood
orworkcloselywithagriculturalproducerstodevelopfarmmanagementplansortobringtheir
productstomarketsfocusedonchallengesthatsmallandmid-sizeproducersfaceinscalingup
theiroperationsandinmaintainingviablebusinessmodels.Thesestakeholdersdetailedspecific
zoningandtaxationpolicychangesthattheybelievewouldbestsupportincreasedfood
productioninwesternWashington.Accesstoirrigationwaterandmanagingfloodrisksare
centralissuesthatdriveproducers’decisions.
Consumerrepresentatives(5individuals):individualsexperiencedwithconcernsandpriorities
drivingSeattlearearesidents’foodpurchasingdecisionsobservedastable,butnotnecessarily
growing,interestinlocallyproducedfoodandperceivedthatthepublicgenerallyhaslimited
awarenessofwaterandenergyissuesassociatedwithagriculture.Consumerswhovaluelocally
grownfoodwereperceivedtodosobecausetheyseecommunity-buildingandeconomic
benefitsofsupportinglocalproducersandtheyappreciatethehighqualityoflocalfood
products.
EnergyandWaterPolicyDecisionMakers(8individuals):individualswhomakenatural
resourcemanagementpolicydecisionsatmunicipal,countyandstatewidescaleshighlighted
managementchallengesrelatedtofrequentfloodingthatKingCountyfarmersface,the
tradeoffsbetweenpreservingriparianzonesforsalmonhabitatandfarmland,andpotential
impactsofincreasingirrigationefficiency.Watermanagerswerehopefulaboutthepotential
forresidents’waterresourcecouncilstomanagewatereffectivelyinfarmingcommunities.
Otherkeyissuesraisedwerethedifficultyofcreatingwatermarketsinthecontextofrecent
courtdecisionsaboutwaterrightstransfers.
FoodPolicyDecisionMakers(7individuals):individualsfocusedonagriculturalpolicyor,
separately,foodaccesspolicydiscussedtheimportanceofprogramsthatsupportfarmersand
farmlandpreservation:aneedtobalanceresourceallocationtosupportfarmerscurrentlyand
7
toensurelong-termpreservationofagriculturallandsandproductivityintheregion.They
identifiedmarketforcesandfederalpoliciesthatperpetuateexistingagriculturalpractices.In
thecontextofthesemarketandfederalpolicyforces,craftingappropriateandallowablelocal
foodandagriculturalpoliciesisachallenge.
2.STAKEHOLDERINTERVIEWFINDINGSABOUTSEATTLEWASHINGTONFEWNEXUS
2.1.MULTIPLEVISIONSOFASUSTAINABLEFOODSYSTEMFUTURE
Seattle-areastakeholdersholddifferentvisionsofanidealfoodsystemforthefuture.These
visionsimplydifferentprojectedpatternsofFEWresourceinteractions.Broadlyspeaking,the
stakeholdersinterviewedforthisprojectbelievethatitisadesirablegoaltoincreasefood
productioninKingCountyandwesternWashingtonandincreaseconsumptionoflocally
producedfoodintheSeattlearea.Twodistinctvisionsofanidealregionalfoodproduction
futureemergedfromamongtheinterviewees:1)Adenselyurbanizedregionshouldbe
surroundedbyhighlyproductivelargerfarms,2)Asmallerurbancoreshouldbesurroundedby
greenspaceusedforfoodproductioninterspersedthroughtheresidentialzones.Many
stakeholdersdon'tseethesevisionsofthefutureasmutuallyexclusive,statingthattheywould
liketoseemoreopportunitiesforfarmsofallsizesthroughouttheregion.Differentpatterns
mayalsobeappropriateforcitiesofdifferentsizesandenvironmentalsettings.Atthesame
time,severalstakeholdersexpressedfrustrationthatagenciesandorganizationsare
occasionallyworkingatcross-purposesbysupportingdifferentvisions,asexpressedinzoning,
farmlandpreservationpolicies,taxationstructures,andinfrastructureinvestments.
Advocatesforthesharpurban-agriculturalboundarymodelfeelthatsprawlisaserious
concernandwouldliketomaximizetheefficiencyoflocalfoodproductionbyscalingup
farmingoperationstomeetahigherproportionoflocalfooddemand.Thesestakeholders
expectthatlargerfarmsmaybeabletoeffectivelyimplementtechnologiesthatensuremore
efficientuseofirrigationwaterandenergy.Somestakeholdersseelargerlocalfarmsasa
pathwaytowarddecreasingrelianceonagriculturalproductsfromoutsideoftheregion.They
expectthatlargerfarmswouldhavegreatercapacitytosupplygrocerychainsanddistribution
companieswithlocalproduceandthateconomiesofscalecouldsupportincreasedlocalfood
processingforout-of-seasonconsumption.Increasinglocalfoodprocessingcouldincreaselocal
energyandwaterusewhilereducingtransportationenergyuse.
Advocatesforthemixedurban-agriculturalmodelfocusonthesocialandculturalbenefitsof
urbanandlocalfoodproduction.Thesestakeholdersstatethatitisimportantforconsumersto
strengthentheirconnectiontothepeoplewhogrowtheirfoodandtobetterunderstandthe
environmentalconsiderationsassociatedwithagriculture.Stakeholdersinfavorofmixed
urban-agriculturaldevelopmentemphasizethevalueofpoliciesthatsupportsmall-andmid
8
sizeproducersinprocessingandsellingproductslocallyandgenerallyfocuslessontheamount
oflocalproductionthanonsupportingpracticesthatconservesoilandwaterresources.
Somestakeholderssupportamixtureofseverallandusepoliciesandlocalfoodpolicies.
Focusingondifferentvalues,andemphasizingthosevaluesindifferentcombinations,leadsto
differentpolicyalternatives,whichinfluencehowFEWresourcesareallocated,used,andhow
theyflowacrossregionalboundaries.Detailedexplorationofthesemanypossiblepolicy
optionsistheidealuseofaFEW-systemmodel.
Inresponse,weareinterestedincompilingexamplesofdifferentzoningapproachesin
Washingtoncountiesandinotherstates,includinghowurbangrowthboundariesand
agriculturalzonesaredefinedandhowdifferentagriculturalusesareincentivized.Wearealso
interestedintheperceivedorrealizedopportunitiesandconsequencesassociatedwith
emergingpracticessuchasindoorvegetablecultivationandtheuseofreclaimedwastewater
forirrigation.ItisthesetypesofpolicydecisionsandtheirassociatedimpactonFEWresource
utilizationthatourmodelwillultimatelyhelptest;allowingpolicymakerstomakeinformed
decisions.
Interviewees’MostFrequentlyExpressedPolicyGoals
•
Expandpublicandprivatefarmlandpreservationprograms;focusonmaintaining
urbandensityandfightingsprawl.
•
Preservegreenspaceandutilizeopenspaceforfoodproduction,preservesoil
qualityonfarmlandfordrainageandcarbonstoragebenefits.
•
Rewardfoodproductioninurbanspaces,residentialspaces,andonfarmland.
•
Maximizetheefficiencyoffoodproduction,whilepursuingneutralorpositive
impactsonsoilquality,waterquality,andairquality.
•
Preferentiallysupportcertaintypesofagriculturalproduction(e.g.,incentivize
fruitsandvegetablesoverforageproduction,useofgrainasacovercrop,and
promotelocalwheatororganicmeat).
•
Designatelandcurrentlyzonedforagricultureas“workingland”inthe
WashingtonStateGrowthManagementAct,sothatagriculturallandsare
protectedunderstate,aswellascounty,laws.
•
Expandinstitutionalmarketsforlocalfood,includinghospitals,universities,
businesses,andlargerestaurantchains.
9
2.2.ONSUSTAININGREGIONALFOOD,ENERGYANDWATER
DIVERSITYOFREGIONALAGRICULTURE
StakeholdersemphasizedthatthechallengesofmostconcerntoWashingtonstateproducers
arehighlyvariabledependingontheirspecificlocalclimate,topography,zoning,andnatural
resourcepolicies,aswellastheirpersonalbackground,values,andbusinessmodel.Depending
onthekindsofagriculturaloperationsstakeholdersworkmostcloselywith,theirperspectives
onthemostimpactfulpoliciesandmostsignificantchallengesdiffer.
ForeachagriculturalcommodityproducedinWashington,afewcountiesdominateproduction.
Wheatproductionisconcentratedinsoutheastcounties,whilemilkproductionisgreatestin
YakimacountyandnorthernPugetSound(Whatcom,SkagitandSnohomishcounties)(USDA
NASS,2012).Applesaregrownthroughoutthestate,butmorethanhalfofWashington’sapple
acresareplantedinYakimaandGrantcounties(USDANASS,2012).Vegetableproductionis
concentratedinGrant,Benton,andFranklincounties.Averagefarmsizevariesgreatlyamong
counties.
Diversityinfarmingoperationsexistsevenatthecountyscale.KingCountyhasfiveagricultural
productiondistricts(APDs),whichencompass42,000acresofprimefarmland(Figure2).
AgricultureissupportedwithintheAPDsthroughtheprotectionofagriculturalsoilsandstrict
limitationsregardingdevelopment(KingCountyLocalFoodInitiative,2015).InKingCounty,
farmsizesrangefromseveral-acreorganicvegetablegrowingoperationstolargecommercial
forageproducers.Stakeholdersnotedthatnearly80%oftheactivelyfarmedlandinKing
Countyisusedforlivestockproductioninsomeform(e.g.,dairies,pasture,orforage
production).Landgrowingmarketcrops(non-irrigatedflowers,irrigatedspecialtyandorganic
vegetables,berries,orchardfruits,andwinegrapes)accountsfor5%oftheAPDarea.With245
vegetablefarms,KingCountyhasthelargestnumberofvegetablefarmsofanyWashington
county.However,thetotalacreageplantedtovegetablesin2012wasjust984acres,foran
averagefarmsizeof4acres(USDANASS,2012).Thegrosssaleablemarketvalueoffruitand
vegetableproductioninKingCountyisestimatedat$20million(KingCountyLocalFood
Initiative,2015).
10
Figure2.LocationsofKingCountyAgriculturalProductionDistricts.
THREATSTOREGIONALFOODSYSTEMSUSTAINABILITY
Climatechangeisanincreasinglyprominenttopicinstakeholders’discussionsofchallengesfor
theregionalfoodandagriculturesystem.Highertemperatureshavemanypossible
consequencesforproducers,includingincreasedwaterdemand,lessreliablesummerwater
availabilitybecauseofreducedsnowpack,earlyseasonflooding,earlierharvestdates,and
changesinpestanddiseasepressures.Thereareconcernsaboutincreasedincidenceof
extremeweatherevents,droughts,andflooding.Thesechangesadduncertaintiestowhatis
alreadyaveryhigh-riskbusiness.Consumersgenerallyhavelessawarenessabouttheimpacts
ofclimatechangeontheagriculturalsystemsthatsupporttheirfoodsupply.
Accesstowaterforirrigationisanongoingconcernformanystakeholders.Intervieweesnoted
thatKingCountyunderwentashiftinthelate70sandearly80swhenmanydairiesclosedand
thenumberofsmallfruitandvegetableproducersbegantoexpand.Astraditionallivestock
agriculturefarmsconvertedtocropproduction,somefarmscamewithhistoricwaterrights,
11
butmanydidnot.Innavigatingthewaterrightssystemsomefarmershavebeenabletolease
water,whileothershiftedtogrowingun-irrigatedflowersorareusingexemptwells.
Intervieweesnotedthatintypicalsummerconditionsfarmerswithoutaccesstogroundwater
arestillabletogrowflowersandsomeothercropsiftheyarelocatedclosetoariverwheresoil
holdssufficientmoisture,butindroughtconditionsthosefarmsareatriskofsubstantiallosses.
Climatechangeisexpectedtointensifychallengesforunirrigatedfarms.
FloodingisaseriousmanagementchallengeforKingCountyproducersinparticular.Federal
FoodandDrugAdministrationregulationspreventfoodcropsthathavebeentouchedby
floodwatersfrombeingharvested.Also,somecroppinginsuranceoptionsarenotavailableto
growersinfloodplains.Somewhatironically,atthesametime,floodplainsoilsarerich,hold
waterwell,andhaveashallowwatertablethatcanbeusefultothecrops.Beinginafloodplain
limitswherefarminfrastructurecanbebuiltandwherehomesforfarmerscanbebuilt.As
localfooddemandincreasesforshoulderseasonandyear-roundproduction,earlyspringor
latefallfloodingisanevenmoresignificantconcern.
2.3.ONPROMOTINGLOCALLYPRODUCEDFOOD
DEFINING“LOCAL”
IncreasingtheproportionoftheSeattle-areafoodsupplythatislocallyproducedisadesirable
goalaccordingtomany.Moststakeholdersplacedemphasisontheconceptofsourcingfood
products“ascloseasisreasonable”,statingthatsustainableproductionisamoreimportant
valuethanhyper-localproduction.Variationsofthisstatementwerefrequntlyheard:“Food
shouldbeproducedasclosetowhereit'sconsumedaspossible,butthatwillbedifferentfor
everytypeoffood”.Therewasawidespreadviewthatpolicymakersandconsumersshould
focusonsupportingefficientfoodsourcing;makingdecisionsbasedon“whateachregiondoes
best”.Stakeholdersinallsectorsinterviewedtendedtohaveflexibledefinitionsforwhatmakes
foodlocal.
IntervieweesrecognizedthatsourcingallSeattle’sfoodfromwithinKingCounty--oreven
withinWashingtonState--isnotrealisticintheforeseeablefuturebasedonconsumers’desire
forproductsthatcannotreadilybegrowninWashington(e.g.avocadosandbananas).Several
stakeholdersstatedthattheythoughtofconcentriccircleswhendefiningwhichproductsare
local—givingpreferencetocropsgrownintheimmediateareainseason,butconsidering,for
example,aproductgrowninOregontobemorelocal,andhencepreferable,tothesame
productgrowninCalifornia.Themesinperspectivesonlocalfoodproductionfromdifferent
stakeholdergroupsareoutlinedbelowonthefollowingpage.
12
Producerrepresentatives:
• Businessandlandfirst:Producerstendtoprioritizewhetherfoodproductionis
environmentallyresponsibleandeconomicallypractical,sellinglocallyisgenerallynota
toppriority.
• Diversedistance:ManyproducerswhosellatSeattleareafarmers’marketsarefarming
ontheurbanfringe,butsomeproducerscomefromasfarawayascentralandeastern
Washington.
• Cooperative…ornot?:Forproducers’cooperatives,aconnectiontoaspecificagricultural
placenamemaybeseenasanopportunitytotapintocustomerrecognition.
Cooperativemembersmaydisagreeaboutwhichfarmsshouldbenefitfromthat“local”
branding,dependingontheiractuallocationandtheproductionpracticesthatthey
employ.
Consumerrepresentatives:
• Localisnot“local”:SomeSeattlecustomersmaysaythatwithin150milesofthecityis
local,butthatdefinitioneliminatesmostofWashington’sappleproduction,whichthey
alsoconsider“local”.
• Freshnesscounts:Whenconsumersplaceahighvalueonlocalfoodproductionitis
oftenbecauselocallyproducedfoodstendtobefresh,highqualityandassumedtobe
sustainablyproduced.Definitionsoflocalmaychangewithseasons;itiseasiertoeat
locallyduringharvestseason.Manyconsumerslackknowledgeaboutwhatfoodscanbe
grownlocallyandduringwhatseasonstheyareavailable.
• Food-typematters:Localproduce,meat,dairyproductsarehigherprioritiesfor
consumersthanarelocallyproducedgrainsandpackagedfoods.
EnergyandWaterPolicyDecisionMakers:
• Priorappropriations:LawgovernswateraccessinWashington.Therecurrentlyareno
legalmechanismsforgivingpreferencetowateruseforlocalfoodproduction.
• Transportationcosts:Theenergycostsassociatedwithtransportingfoodarean
importantconsideration;thelargestenergycostinthefoodsystemmaybeconsumers
drivingtheirpersonalvehiclestogrocerystores.
FoodPolicyDecisionMakers:
• Localisnoteverything:Focusingondefinitionsof“local”maydistractfrommorecritical
foodandagriculturepolicyissuesincludingfoodaccess,energyandwateruse,and
generalsustainabilityoffarmingoperations.
• Localdiffersbycrop:Whatconstituteslocalvariesfordifferentcrops;forexample,
manyfeelthatsourcingSeattle’swheatfromeasternWAisanimportantgoal.
• Influencesoftrade:ManyfeelthatsystemsshouldadaptsomoreWashington-grown
productsstaywithintheregionratherthanbeingshippedinternationally.
• Intersectingvalues:Formanypolicymakers,supportinglocalfoodisanimportantvalue
becauseitislinkedtotheobjectivesofpreservingopenspaceandpreservingthe
livelihoodoffarmersinruralcommunities.
13
StakeholdersrecognizethatthemajorityoffoodconsumedintheSeattlemetroareacomes
fromlargenationalgrocerychainsandrestaurantchains.Whiletheregionhasarobust
networkofproducers,processors,andinnovativefoodcompanies,stakeholdersfrequently
notesthatfarmers’markets,CommunitySupportedAgriculture(CSA)shares,anddirectfarm
salesaretheexceptiontotheruleofwheremostoftheurbanpopulationpurchasesfood.
Currentlylessthan2%ofthenearly$6billionKingCountyresidentsspendannuallyonfood
anddrinkisgrownwithinKingCounty(KingCountyLocalFoodInitiative,2015).Still,
intervieweesperceiveSeattleresidentstobeamongthenation’sleadersintheirinterestand
supportforalocalfoodculture.Organicandsustainablyproducedfoodsareimportanttomany
areaconsumersandsupportinglocalfarmersisapriorityforsomeshoppers.Intervieweeswere
dividedastowhetherSeattle’smarketforlocallyproducedfoodissaturatedorgrowing.
TRADEOFFSRELATEDTOINCREASINGLOCALFOODPRODUCTION
Intervieweeswereasked,“Whatdoyouseeaspotentialdrawbacks,ifany,toincreasingfood
productionforlocalmarkets?”Stakeholderstendednottothinkintermsof“negativeaspects
oflocalproduction”.Instead,whilerecognizingthatsupportinglocalfoodproductioncouldbe
linkedtotradeoffsforwateruse,energyuse,habitatprotectionfornativespecies,andother
socialandenvironmentalgoals,stakeholderstendedtobelievethatreducingvirtualwaterand
energyflowsfromoutsidetheregionwasadesirablegoalformetroSeattle.Inpartthisis
basedonasociallyresponsibleviewpointofwantingtolocalizesomeofthe“externalities”of
foodproduction(e.g.wateruseandenergyconsumption)insteadofexternalizingthemto
othercommunities.Additionally,stakeholderspointedoutthatfarmlandfulfillsimportant
social,culturalandenvironmentalservices,suchascarbonstorageandfloodcontrol.Inthis
sectionweexploresomeofthetradeoffsstakeholdersidentifiedaspotentiallyassociatedwith
increasinglocalfoodproductionfortheSeattlepopulation.
Food-Watertradeoffs:Increasinglocalfoodproductionisassumedtorequireincreasedwater
usageforirrigationunlesssubstantialincreasesinefficiencyareincentivizedandimplemented.
Atthesametime,theregioncontinuestoexperiencerapidpopulationandindustrialgrowth.
Regionaldecision-makersmustaccountfor,andcontendwith,projectionsforawater-scare
future.Existingwaterallocationlawsandconservationofendangeredfishareatthecoreof
manyconcernsforawater-scarcefuture;policiescannotnecessarilypreservein-streamwater
flowsforfishhabitatandintensiveirrigationatthesametime.Choosingtoincreaselocalfood
productionmaynecessitatetradeoffswithwateruseinothersectorsandmayrequirewater
conservationpolicies,suchas:notwateringlawnssowatercangotolocalfood,avoidinghome
gardenstoprioritizecommercialfoodproductionoverpersonaluses,usingreclaimed
wastewaterforfoodproduction,andincentivizinggreywaterhouseholdsystemstoreduce
potablewateruse.Stakeholdersexplainedthatrecentcourtcaseshavesetstandardsthat
makeitdifficulttotransferwaterrightsfromoneusetoanother,forexampletore-allocate
municipalwaterforagriculture.WatershedImprovementDistrictsareapolicymechanismthat
hasbeeninplacesinceearlyinWashingtonStatehistorybutareonlyrecentlycomingintouse
14
againforgroupsofproducersseekingtocollectivelymanagewaterresources.Some
stakeholdersviewedtheseDistrictsasanaspectofahopefulfuture.
Stakeholdersexpressedarangeofperspectivesaboutthepotentialuseofreclaimed
wastewaterforirrigation.SomedescribedcurrentpilotprojectsnowunderwayinKing
Countyusingreclaimedwastewatertoirrigatenon-foodcropsandplayingfields.The
conceptraisedsomeconcernsfromstakeholdersthinkingaboutitfromapublichealth
andsafetystandpoint.Manystakeholdersexplainedthattheydidnotyethaveenough
informationaboutthepotentialbenefitsandconcernsofirrigatingcropsinwestern
Washingtonwithreclaimedwastewatertoevaluatetheoption.
Food-Energytradeoffs:Formanystakeholders,theconnectionbetweenfoodproductionand
energyresourceswassomewhatlesstangibleandlessclearlydefinedthantheconnection
betweenfoodandlocalwaterresources.Thepossibilityofexpandingindoorfoodproduction
doesraisequestionsaboutenergyneedsandwhattherelativecostsandbenefitsareof
growinglocallyinaclimatecontrolledenvironmentwithmunicipalwatercomparedtoless
locally,outdoors,withstreamorgroundwater.Stakeholdersdescribedinterestintestprojects,
uncertaintyaboutbuildingandenergycosts,anduncertaintywhetherindoorurbanproduction
canbeprofitableenoughtojustifythecosts.Thereareexamplesofsuccessfulmicrogreens
indoorcultivationintheSeattlearea,whichsomestakeholdersreferencedasanexampleof
indoorgrowingthatmaybeenvironmentallysoundandeconomicallyprofitable.Questions
aroundthefutureofindoorgrowingalsoaroseregardingnewWashingtonStatelawsthat
legalizegrowingmarijuana;thereareremainingquestionsaboutwheremarijuanacultivationis
allowedandhowtobalancewaterandenergyresourcesneededtogrowmarijuanaagainst
waterandenergyresourcesneededforlessprofitablecrops.Intensifyingproductionand
intensifyingprocessinginfrastructurecouldintensifyenergyandwaterresourceuseforthis
newregulated-marketcommodity.
2.4.ONPOLICIESANDDECISIONMAKING
RECENTFOODPOLICYINIATIVES
TheSeattleCityCouncilpassedtheLocalFoodActionInitiativein2008,aimingtosupportthe
localandregionalfoodsystem.SpecificgoalsoftheLocalFoodActionInitiativeinclude
preventingfoodwasteandincreasingcompostingofnon-ediblefood,supportingsmall
businessesthatgrow,processanddistributelocalandhealthyfood,prioritizingfood
productionasauseofland,andworkingtoincreasetheaffordabilityandaccessibilityof
healthyfoodforallSeattleresidents(CityofSeattle,2012).TheKingCountyExecutive'sLocal
FoodInitiativewasintroducedin2014toconnectlocalfarmersandconsumers,increaseaccess
tohealthy,affordablefoodsinunderservedareas,protectfarmlandandimplementstrategies
toimproveresiliencetotheeffectsofclimatechange(KingCountyLocalFoodInitiative2015).
15
Specific10-yeartargetsputforthinthe2015LocalFoodInitiativeKitchenCabinet’sLocalFood
Reportincludeadding400netnewacresinfoodproductionperyearinKingCounty(2%per
year),increasingthenumberofnewandbeginningfarmersinKingCountyby25newfarmers
peryear,doublingdemandforlocallyproduced,healthyfoodfrom$93millionto$186million,
reducingtheamountofwholesomefoodlossby25%,andincreasingconsumptionoffruitsand
vegetablesamongbothyouthandadults(LocalFoodInitiative,2015).
PRODUCERS’DECISION-MAKINGCONSIDERATIONS
Farmmanagementdecisionsmustbesitespecific.Producers’valuesandthepolitical,social,
environmental,andeconomiclandscapeinwhichtheyareoperatinginfluencetheirproduction
andmanagementdecisions.ThesefundamentaldecisionsareaffectedbyoraffecthowFEW
resourcesareutilizedlocallyandhowthoseresourcesflowacrossregions.Overall,thereisa
widespreadperceptionamongstintervieweesthatfarmerswanttobegoodstewardsofthe
landandthusmaybeamenabletochangestopoliciesorpracticesthatpromoteasustainable
FEWenvironment.However,farmmanagementdecisionsaresitespecificandproducersvary
intheirapproachestomanuremanagement,dealingwithmudinthewintermonths,rotational
grazing,streambankprotection,pollinatorhabitatpreservation,pesticideuse,andmore.
FarminginWashingtonistiedtorichculturaltraditions.Somefarmshavebeeninafamilyfor
overfivegenerations.KingCountyalsohasmanyimmigrantfarmersforwhomagricultureisa
linktotheircountryoforiginandtotheirlocalcommunity.Fortheseandotherproducers,
stayinginbusinessisimportanteconomicallyaswellassociallyandculturally.Farming
practicesdirectlyaffecthowFEWresourcesareutilizedlocallyandhowthoseresourcesflow
acrossregions.Therefore,culturalheritagecanbeconsideredavariablethatneedstobe
incorporatedinscenariodevelopmenttounderstandlocalandregionaltrade-offsinFEW
resourcemanagement.Thiswillbeparticularlyimportantwherepreservingaculturalpractice
iseitheratoddswithphysicalresourceuseefficiencyorenhancesresourceuseefficiency.
Consumerdemandplaysaroleinshapingproductionpractices.Inthepastdecadeconsumer
demandfororganicproductsandthehighermarketvalueoforganicproducehaveinfluenced
manyproducersintheregiontopursueorganiccertification.Somefarmerslookattheirannual
salesandmakeadjustmentstowhattheywillgrowbasedonthatinformation.Cropsand
productionsystemsutilizewaterandenergydifferently,sotheseconsumerdrivendemands
shapehowFEWresourcesareutilizedlocallyandhowthoseresourcesflowacrossregions.
ProducersmaymoveawayfromwhatisbestgrowninthePNWtofavorwhatthedemandis
regardlessoftheFEWimplications.Afarmers’marketmanagerobservedthatmanyproducers
arepursuingabusinessmodelwitharoughlybalancedcombinationofrestaurantsales,
wholesale,andfarmers’marketsales.Stakeholdersnotedthat,asinanybusiness,successin
agriculturedependsonfindingyournicheandbuildinganactionablebusinessplan.Lackof
marketingskillsandlackoftimetopursuemarketingstrategiesarecommonchallengesfor
producers.TheremaybemoreopportunitiesforentrepreneurialeducationforWashington
producersthatwouldsupporttheminincreasingthesizeoftheirfarmsandincreasingsales.A
16
shiftincropselectionawayfrom“resourceefficient”cropswouldchangethebalanceofFEW
resources,butcouldpotentiallybeeconomicallybeneficialforproducers.
Producersareconcernedaboutalackofaccesstofoodpacking,processing,andstorage
facilitities.Increasingthenumberandaccessibilityofsuchfacilitiesforproducerscould
increasethequantityoffoodthatcanbeproducedandconsumedintheSeattlearea.Atthe
sametime,food-processingoperationscoulddemandincreasedlocalenergyandwaterinputs.
Somestakeholdersnotedthatlackofaccesstoprocessingfacilitiesmaybelessofabarrierthan
itiscommonlycitedtobe,notingthatsomeunderutilizedfacilitiesexistandthatmore
significantbarriersmaybeproducers’lackoftimeandlackofrelevantskillsetstoaddvalueto
rawproducts.OthergapsininfrastructurewerealsocitedasbarriersforWashington
producers.Forexample,lackoffundingforrailwayandroadmaintenanceisachallengefor
producersinruralpartsofthestatewhocouldotherwiseperhapsparticipateinthemarketfor
locallyproducedfoods.
ThecostoflandinwesternWashingtonishigh.SeveralstakeholdersassertedthatKing
Countylandpricesaretypicallytoohightopurchasedandprofitablyfarmed.Farmland
preservationprogramsandlandtrustsareimportanttoolsforsupportingfarming.Some
stakeholdersstatedthattherearemorepotentialfarmersthanthereisavailableland.
Sometimestheissueissimplyfindingsufficientacreageforsaleintheareainwhichafarmer
wantstobuy.Beingabletoscaleupafarmhastodowiththecostofland,butitcanalsobea
challengeifapotentialbuyers’lacksunderstandingoflendingoptionsandhowtocraftaniche
businessplan.Somepotentialpropertiesmayalsoposeconcernswithpastoveruse,
contamination,orendangeredspeciesimpacts.Manyproducersleaselandonshort-term
leasesandcannotsecurecapitaltomakelongtermsinvestmentsintheirfarmland,for
example,efficientirrigationsystems.Landpriceandlandtenureareimpactedbypoliciesandin
turnshapepatternsofFEWresourceuse.Onestakeholdernotedthatitisdifficultforcounties
tosupportagricultureatthepolicylevelbecauseitdoesnotgenerateasmuchmoneyfrom
propertytaxesasotherlanduses.
Laborandeconomicconcernsaffectagriculturalpractices.Anumberoffactorscurrently
contributelimitsonavailablelaborincludinglaborshortage(immigrationrestrictionshave
reducedthenumberofseasonalagriculturalworkerscomingtoWashingtonstate),findingand
retainingqualifiedemployees(somestakeholdersnoteashortageofworkerswithnecessary
skillsforspecializedagriculturallabor),andpayingadecentwage(thecostoflivinginWestern
Washingtonishighandpayingalivingwagethatwillattractandretainemployeesmaymean
payingmorethanminimumwage).Mid-sizeproducersinparticularfacechallengesto
obtainingeconomicstability.Taxstructuresdon’tnecessarilyrewardfoodproduction,for
example,stakeholdersnotedthatmanylandownerselecttousefarmlandforhorsesorforage,
ratherthancultivatinglandforfoodcrops.Severalstakeholderswhoworkcloselywith
producerswereconcernedthatnewKingCountyhealthdepartmentregulationsandthe
federalFoodSafetyActareaburdenforlocalproducersandrepresentasignificantbarrierto
small-scaleproducersbecausetheyrequiretrainingandcertificationthatiscostlyandtime
17
consumingtoobtain.Ingeneral,thegrowingseasonandlaborconditionsinWashingtonleadto
moreexpensiveproductionthanotherpartsoftheUSandworld.Onestakeholdernotedthat
thecostofproductioninWashingtoncanbeuptothreetimesthatinCalifornia;forexamplea
vegetableproducerinCalifornia’scentralvalleymaybeabletoharvestbroccoli2-3timesa
year,butWashington’sshortergrowingseasonlimitsbroccoliproductiontoonecropperyear.
CONSUMERS’DECISION-MAKINGCONSIDERATIONS
Consumershaveincreasinglysophisticatedknowledgeabouttheirfoodpurchasingoptions,
whichisafunctionofawealthofreadilyaccessibleinformationonline.Stakeholdersobserveda
generationaltrendtowardconsumerspurchasingmorepreparedfoodsandlessfreshfruits,
vegetablesandrawingredients.Ingeneral,modernconsumerswereperceivedtohaveor
choosetospendlesstimetocookathomethantheydidinpastdecades.Stakeholdersnoted
thatinterestingdemographictrendsemergeincomparingfarmers’marketsalesindifferent
partsofSeattle.Forexample,stakeholdersnotedatendencyforolderconsumerstovalue
organic,freshproducewhileyoungerconsumersseemmorelikelytoshopatfarmersmarkets
forthesocialexperienceandtobuypreparedfoods.Preparingandpackagingfoodscaninvolve
significantwaterandenergyuse.Theseshiftsinconsumerpreferencesmaysignificantlyalter
theembeddedenergyandwaterassociatedwithfoodproduction,processing,transportation,
andultimatelyconsumption.Policydecisionsonwhatisallowedtobesoldatfarmersmarkets
canimpactthoseFEWresourceallocations.
Seattleisperceivedtobeanationalleaderinfoodtrends,witharobustfarmersmarket
cultureandstronginterestinorganicallyproducedproducts.Whileadesireforfreshhigh
qualityproduceandinterestinsupportingthelocaleconomyaresaidtomotivateconsumers’
interestinlocallyproducedfoods,stakeholdersobservedthatSeattleconsumershavecometo
expectaccesstoallfoodsyearround.Theconceptofeatingseasonallyispercieivedtobetoo
limitingbythevastmajorityconsumers.Stakeholders’opinionsvariedwidelyonwhether
marketingcampaignsforlocalfoodwork;somebelievedthatpromotinglocalproductswasa
keycomponentofsupportingtheregionallocaleconomy,whileothersfeltthatmarketing
campaignsdoverylittletoinfluenceconsumerbehavior.Clearlythesepoliciesandconsumer
choicesaffecthowand“who's”waterandenergyareused.
Accesstohighquality,nutritious,affordablefoodforthediverseurbanpopulationisacritical
componentofanydiscussionaboutfoodpolicy.Stakeholdersexpressedenthusiasticsupport
fortheFreshBucksprogram,whichmatchesfoodstampdollarsatareafarmersmarkets.There
isrecognitionthatultimatelythepriceoffoodandaccesstopurchasingoptionsdetermines
mostoftheSeattlepopulation’sfoodpurchasingdecisions.Anypoliciesorbehaviorsthatshift
theallocationofwherefoodisproducedwillaltertheallocationandflowsofenergyandwater
acrossregions.
18
3.NextSteps
RecognizingthatthereisawealthofrecentreportsanddataaboutSeattleareafoodsystems,
weareintheprocessoflearningfrompreviousresearchintheregion.AttheUrbanFoodEnergy-WaterStakeholderSummitwewilldelvedeeperintoadiscussionaboutintersecting
food,energyandwaterresourcemanagementissuesandpotentialimplicationsofpolicy
decisionsinregion.OurresearchteamwillpresentaconceptualmodelofFEWsystemsat
nestedcity-local-regionalscalesandwillmodifyanddevelopthatmodelbasedonstakeholder
input,toformthebasisofamodeling-baseddecision-supportandanalysistool.
Wehopethatthisprojectbuildsonthestrongtraditionofcollaborationaroundfoodand
agricultureresearch,planning,andpolicy-makingintheregionandprovidesdecision-makers
withusefultoolsthatgeneratenewinsightintosysteminteractions.
UrbanFood-Energy-WaterSummit
http://metrocenter.wsu.edu/metrofew-summit2016/
Who:Youareinvited!Localpolicydecisionmakers,agriculturalproducers,governmentagency
personnel,NGOrepresentatives,industryrepresentatives,researchersandmembersofthe
publicinterestedinthefutureoflocalfoodsystemsshouldallparticipate.
Where:TheBrightwaterConventionCenter,22505StateRoute9SEWoodinville,WA98072
When:FridayNovember18,2016,Publicmorningsession8:30-11:00am
Sign-uphere:http://urbanfew.brownpapertickets.com
(Note:Aby-invitationafternoonbreakoutsessionandluncheonwillbeheldafterthepublic
portionoftheSummitfrom11:00-4:30pm.PleasecontactLizAllen,[email protected],ifyou
wouldlikeaninvitationtotheafternoonsession.)
19
4.Acknowledgements
ThisworkwasmadepossiblewithfundingfromtheWSUCenterforSustainingAgricultureand
NaturalResources(CSANR),theWSUCenterforEnvironmentalResearch,Educationand
Outreach(CEREO),andtheStateofWashingtonWaterResourceCenter.
Thankyouallofthestakeholderswhoparticipatedinthisworkthusfar!Thisreportwould
notbepossiblewithoutthefollowingindividualswhogenerouslygavetheirtimetobe
interviewed.
Stakeholder
Group
Producers
and
Producer
Affiliates
Name
JayMirro
JoshMonaghan
MaryEmbleton
ColinMcCrate
SiriErikson-Brown
Consumer
sector
Respresentatives
Energyand
waterpolicy
decision
makers
LeighNewman-Bell
HannahCavendish
Palmer
ChrisCurtis
ZackCook
DanaGould
ScottOwen
DianeDempster
JoannaRichey
RichardMartin
TedSullivan
PatriceBarrentine
Foodpolicy
decision
makers
SteveEvans
ScottPowell
LauraBerg
DaveChristenson
MichaelLufkin
MelissaCampbell
LizUnderwoodBultmann
PhyllisShulman
SharonLerman
RussellLehman
LeifFixen
Affiliation
SeniorResourcePlanner,KingCountyConservationDistrict
SeniorProgramManagerPlanningandStrategicInitiatives,King
CountyConservationDistrict
KCDRegionalFoodSystemGrantProgramManager,KingCounty
ConservationDistrict
Co-Founder,SeattleUrbanFarmCounty
Fruitandvegetableproducer,LocalRootsFarmandSnoqualmie
WatershedImprovementDistrict
FarmIncubatorOutreachCoordinator,PikePlaceMarketFoundation
Director,SnoqualmieValleyFarmersCooperative
ExecutiveDirector,SeattleNeighborhoodFarmersMarkets
MarketManager,PikePlaceMarket
FoodAccessProjectCoordinator,PikePlaceMarketFoundation
GroceryMerchandiser,PCCNaturalMarkets
GrowerLiaison,Charlie’sProduce
FormerAssistantDirector(retired),KingCountyWaterandLand
ResourcesDivision
ManagingSupervisor,KingCountyWaterandLandResources
Division
FarmlandPreservationProgramManager,KingCountyWaterand
LandResourcesDivision
AgPolicyProject/ProgramManager,KingCountyWaterandLand
ResourcesDivision
FarmSpecialist,KingCountyWaterandLandResourcesDivision
EnvironmentalAnalyst,SeattleCityLightEnvironmentalAffairs
PolicyDirector,WashingtonAssociationofCounties
PolicyUnitSupervisor,WashingtonDepartmentofEcology
LocalFoodEconomyManager,KingCountyLocalFoodInitiative
AssociateDirector,PCCFarmlandTrust
SeniorPlanner,PugetSoundRegionalCouncil,RegionalFoodPolicy
Council
FoundingMember,RegionalFoodPolicyCouncil
FoodPolicyAdvisor,SeattleFoodActionPlan
Director,WashingtonSustainableFood&FarmingNetwork
PNWConservationProgramManager,AmericanFarmlandTrust
20
5.References
Chang,H.,Jung,I.W.,Strecker,A.,Wise,D.,Lafrenz,M.,Shandas,V.,...&Johnson,G.(2013).
Watersupply,demand,andqualityindicatorsforassessingthespatialdistributionofwater
resourcevulnerabilityintheColumbiaRiverbasin.Atmosphere-Ocean,51(4),339-356.
CityofSeattle.(2012).CityofSeattleFoodActionPlan,October2012.Retrievedfrom
http://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/OSE/Seattle_Food_Action_Plan_10-2412.pdf
CityofSeattle.(2014).RecommendationsoftheKingCountyFarmsandFoodRoundtable,
http://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/OSE/FoodandFarms_Roundtable_Final_Recs
_w_appendix_June_2014.pdf
Eigenbrode,S.D.,Capalbo,S.M.,Houston,L.L.,Johnson-Maynard,J.,Kruger,C.,&Olen,B.
(2013).Agriculture:Impacts,AdaptationandMitigation.InClimateChangeintheNorthwest
(pp.149-180).IslandPress/CenterforResourceEconomics.Retrievedfrom
https://www.eopugetsound.org/sites/default/files/ClimateChangeInTheNorthwest.pdf#page=1
90
KingCountyLocalFoodInitiative.(2015).KingCounty’sLocalFoodInitiative.Retrievedfrom
http://your.kingcounty.gov/dnrp/local-food/documents/2015-KC-Local-Food-Report.pdf
KingCountyWaterandLandResourcesDivision(WLRD)andKingCountyAgricultural
Commission.(2009).2009FARMSReport:FutureofAgriculture,RealizeMeaningfulSolutions.
Retrievedfromhttp://your.kingcounty.gov/dnrp/library/water-and-land/agriculture/future-offarming/farms-report-no-apdx.pdf
Luce,C.H.,Abatzoglou,J.T.,&Holden,Z.A.(2013).Themissingmountainwater:Slower
westerliesdecreaseorographicenhancementinthePacificNorthwestUSA.Science,342(6164),
1360-1364.
PugetSoundRegionalCouncil.(2016).“PugetSoundTrends:Onourwayto4Millionpeople”.
Retrievedfromhttp://www.psrc.org/assets/14735/Trend-Population-201607.pdf
PugetSoundRegionalCouncil.(2014).RegionalFoodPolicyCouncil2014-2017ActionPlan.
Retrievedfromhttp://www.psrc.org/assets/11958/food_policy_action_plan_10_2014.pdf
Rosenzweig,C.,Elliott,J.,Deryng,D.,Ruane,A.C.,Müller,C.,Arneth,A.,...&Neumann,K.
(2014).Assessingagriculturalrisksofclimatechangeinthe21stcenturyinaglobalgriddedcrop
modelintercomparison.ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences,111(9),3268-3273.
21
SeattleOfficeofPlanningandCommunityDevelopment.(2016).“AboutSeattle”.Retrieved
from
http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/cityplanning/populationdemographics/aboutseattle/population/
UnitedStatesDepartmentofAgriculture(USDA)NationalAgriculturalStatisticsService(NASS)
CensusofAgriculture.(2012).WashingtonCountyLevelData.Retrievedfrom
https://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2012/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_County
_Level/Washington/
22
6.Appendix:Informationanddataresources
Manypreviousandongoingresearcheffortshaveaddressedquestionsaboutthecapacityof
regionalagriculturetomeetSeattle-areafooddemand.Ourresearchteamisintheprocessof
locatingandanalyzingexistingdataandresources.Wewelcomefurthersuggestionsabout
resourcesforlearningaboutregionallanduse,waterandenergypolicies,agricultural
production,processing,transportation,sales,andtrendsinconsumerbehavior.Thefollowingis
alistofinformationalresourceswehavecollectedthusfar.
DataType
PotentialResources
CountyLandUseDesignations
WashingtonStateDepartmentofCommerce,
FarmBureau
DocumentationofWashingtonState WashingtonMunicipalResearchCenter
ordinancesandregulations
Dataaboutwhereproducersare
PugetSoundFresh
selling&agritourismoperations
FoodsystemfacilitiesinKingCounty KingConservationDistrictInfrastructure
MappingTool
AgriculturallandusesinKing
KingCountyWLRD;NationalAgricultural
County,bycropandacreage
StatisticsService
ConsumerDemandforlocal
HartmanGroup
products
SeattleFarmersmarketsales
SeattleNeighborhoodFarmersMarkets;Pike
PlaceFarmersMarkets
FateoffoodproducedinKing
NorthwestAgribusinessCouncil
County
Statusandallocationofwaterrights WashingtonDept.ofEcologyWashington
WaterResourceTrackingSystem
ADDITIONALREGIONALREPORTS:
AmericanFarmlandTrust.(2012).PlantingtheSeeds:MovingtoMoreLocalFoodinWestern
Washington.
Born,B.,DeMelle,A.,Martin,K.,&Horst,M.(2012).WesternWashingtonFoodshedStudy.
Retrievedfromhttp://wafoodshed.wix.com/western-wa-foodshed
Collins,D.(2009).KingCountyFoodandFitnessInitiativeAgriculturalAssessment.
EcoTrustOregonFoodInfrastructureGapAnalysis(2015).Retrievedfrom
https://ecotrust.org/publication/regional-food-infrastructure/
Green,R.,&Cornell,J.(2015).Regionalmarketanalysisoffoodsecurityandregionalresilience:
wholecommunitypreparednessthroughlocalfoodproductionanddistributionin
Washingtonstate.
23